Comparative studies and healthcare policy: learning and mislearning across borders

Abstract

-This article addresses the vocabulary of crossnational analysis and commentary about health care, health policy and health politics. We conclude there is a large gap between promise and performance in comparative policy commentary and point to major sources of confusion, such as the lack of generally agreed vocabulary, vague language and the use of faddish and misleading terms and aspirational labels (illustrated by a selection of widely used expressions in comparative reports). We next examine the basic purposes of international policy comparison, distinguish three useful and two misleading approaches and frame defensible ground rules for comparative work.KEY WORDS: Comparative policy analysis, international comparison, healthcare, health policy, health politics, policy learning and mislearning, faddish vocabulary, misleading language

Differences in trends of perceived inpatient care quality based on regional socioeconomic level in the United States and Taiwan

“…The differences in health delivery systems between the United States and Taiwan may exacerbate differences in expectations regarding inpatient care quality. There is a general impression that the overall patient satisfaction rate might be higher in Taiwan than in the United States, owing to greater accessibility and the lower cost of care 10,13,28 . However, findings from the almost‐identical survey questions answered by discharged patients in the United States and Taiwan—and potential response tendency (items presented from most positive to most negative) that favored Taiwanese responses—we conclude that US respondents reported higher satisfaction overall.…”

“…The descriptive data show that 68% of patients in single rooms responded positively, whereas 85% of patients in triple or larger rooms responded negatively, which is expected given the prior literature on HCAHPS. 28 The discrepancy between raw percentages and the regression results allude to a lack of correlation between regional household income and individual patients' room assignment in Taiwan.…”

Hospital funding reforms in Canada: a narrative review of Ontario and Quebec strategies

“…We adopted this method, as narrative reviews are “scholarly summar(ies) along with interpretation and critique” [ 28 , 29 ], to help us deepen our understanding of PBF through critical reflection of particular elements of PBF policy and implementation. Here, we define programmes as the “measures actually in place” [ 30 ].…”

“Enticing case study” or “celebrated anomaly”? Policy learning from the Cuban health system

“…They found considerable selectivity in the choice of countries from which to learn, in favor of countries at similar levels of economic development, those sharing a similar ideology, and countries that were culturally similar and which shared the same language. Okma and Marmor, in their analysis, warned against “naïve transplantation” of health policies from other jurisdictions. They argue that learning from other countries must entail a thorough examination of the country‐specific context to see how and in what sense reforms have succeeded.…”